The Last Shall Be First
Explore how God astonishingly flips the script on the status quo.
Explore how God astonishingly flips the script on the status quo.
By Dr. Eli Lizorkin-Girzhel (read bio)
Reading time: 7 min. Impact: Eternity.
Many major Genesis stories consistently challenge primogeniture—the ancient cultural norm where the firstborn son inherits the family’s wealth, title, and authority, leaving younger siblings with diminished prospects. By repeatedly elevating the younger or less-favored sibling, Genesis reveals a divine pattern that subverts human expectations, affirming God’s authority to choose the unlikely to fulfill His promises. For those feeling overlooked or marginalized, these accounts offer profound hope: God sees potential where humanity sees weakness, transforming the “last” into the “first” to accomplish His redemptive purposes.
The rivalry between Cain and Abel sets a dramatic foundation for this motif. Cain, the elder, and Abel, the younger, present offerings to God, but only Abel’s sacrifice finds favor, while Cain’s is rejected (Gen 4:4-5). The text remains silent on why God prefers Abel’s offering, cloaking the decision in mystery and emphasizing divine prerogative. Cain’s jealousy festers into murderous rage, ending Abel’s life in a tragic clash not over inheritance but over God’s approval. Abel, the younger, is exalted in God’s eyes, while Cain’s status as firstborn proves irrelevant.
The narrative of Ishmael and Isaac further illustrates God’s rejection of primogeniture. Ishmael, Abraham’s firstborn through Hagar, holds the natural claim as the elder son (Gen 16:1-4). Yet God designates Isaac, born later to Sarah, as the heir of the covenant, declaring, “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named” (Gen 17:21). The expulsion of Ishmael and Hagar (Gen 21:1-14) is harsh by human standards, but it solidifies God’s choice by prioritizing divine promise over cultural norms. Isaac’s elevation as the younger son mirrors Abel’s favor, reinforcing the pattern of God choosing the unexpected to advance His plan.
The story of Jacob and Esau brings the theme of reversal into sharp focus, rich with tension and human complexity. Even before birth, the twins struggle in Rebekah’s womb, prompting her to seek God’s guidance. The oracle she receives is cryptic: “Two nations are in your womb… one will be stronger than the other” (Gen 25:23). The Hebrew text is ambiguous, leaving it unclear whether the “abundant one” serves the “young one” or vice versa, adding layers to Rebekah’s later actions. Esau is born first, but Jacob, grasping his brother’s heel, earns his name (Ya’akov, from “heel”). Years later, Jacob exploits Esau’s hunger, trading a bowl of red lentil stew for the birthright (Gen 25:29-34). Esau’s impulsive trade is compounded by his marriages to Hittite women, which distress Isaac and Rebekah (Gen 26:34-35), raising fears about his suitability to lead their covenant family. Although Jacob is not without faults, he later deceives Isaac to obtain the firstborn’s blessing (Gen 27:1-40), which represents a material blessing of prosperity and authority. Yet Isaac always intended the covenant blessing of Abraham—promising land and descendants—for Jacob (Gen 28:3-4), confirmed by God in Jacob’s dream of the heavenly stairway (Gen 28:13-14).
The brief but vivid story of Perez and Zerah echoes this pattern in a single, dramatic moment. As Tamar labors, Zerah extends his hand, marked with a scarlet thread to signify firstborn status (Gen 38:27-30). Yet Perez emerges first, claiming precedence. Divine will renders the scarlet thread, a human attempt to define priority, irrelevant, akin to Jacob supplanting Esau. Perez’s unexpected rise carries weight as an ancestor of David (Ruth 4:18-22), tying this reversal to God’s broader covenant plan.
Joseph’s narrative expands the motif to a broader sibling dynamic. As one of Jacob’s younger sons, Joseph receives divine favor through dreams predicting his dominance (Gen 37:5-11). His brothers, envious of their father’s affection and Joseph’s visions, betray him, selling him into slavery. Yet God orchestrates Joseph’s rise to power in Egypt, where his brothers eventually bow before him (Gen 50:18), fulfilling his dreams. Unlike Esau’s shortsighted trade, Joseph’s perseverance aligns with divine providence, enabling him to save his family from famine. Reuben, the firstborn, fades into obscurity, while Joseph’s elevation underscores God’s pattern of favoring the unlikely.
Thank you for praying for and supporting Dr. Eli’s ministry!
The blessing of Manasseh and Ephraim provides a final, symbolic iteration of the motif in the Book of Genesis. When Jacob blesses Joseph’s sons, he crosses his hands, giving the greater blessing to Ephraim, the younger, over Manasseh (Gen 48:8-20). Joseph protests—“Not this way, my father!”—but Jacob’s deliberate act reinforces God’s prerogative. The crossed hands, like Jacob’s heel-grasping or Zerah’s scarlet thread, symbolize divine reversal, tying this story to the broader pattern.
Beyond Genesis, the story of Moses and Aaron in Exodus further illustrates God’s reversal of expected roles (Ex 4:10-16, 7:1-7). Aaron, the elder brother, is a skilled speaker, while Moses, the younger, doubts his eloquence, claiming, “I am slow of speech and tongue” (Ex 4:10). Humanly, Aaron seems better suited for leadership, yet God chooses Moses to lead Israel out of Egypt and receive the covenant at Sinai. God appoints Aaron as Moses’ mouthpiece, declaring, “You shall be as God to him” (Ex 4:16), but Moses holds the primary role as God’s chosen deliverer. This reversal highlights God’s pattern of empowering the less favored or self-doubting to fulfill His purposes, subverting expectations of seniority or natural ability.
The selection of David as king over Israel provides a striking example of divine reversal (1 Sam 16:1-13). Jesse presents his elder sons to Samuel, assuming the firstborn, Eliab, or others like Abinadab or Shammah, would be chosen. Yet God rejects them, declaring, “The Lord looks on the heart” (1 Sam 16:7). David, the youngest, tending sheep and initially overlooked, is anointed king. His rise from the “least” to Israel’s greatest king mirrors the Genesis pattern, showing God’s preference for the humble and unexpected.
This theme of reversal extends beyond individuals to God’s chosen communities. In Deuteronomy 7:7-8, God selects Israel not for their power but because they are “the fewest of all peoples,” whom He loves in order to fulfill His covenant with Abraham. This mirrors the younger siblings’ rise in Genesis, as Israel embodies the “last” made “first.” In the New Testament, Paul describes the Corinthian church as “not many wise, not many mighty” (1 Cor 1:26-29), yet chosen to shame the strong. Like Jacob or Joseph, these communities reflect God’s preference for the overlooked, showing His pattern of reversal shapes not just individuals but entire peoples, offering hope to those who feel insignificant.
The motif of divine reversal finds its pinnacle in Jesus Christ. Born in humble Bethlehem, He is no worldly conqueror (Mic 5:2). Scorned and crucified, He is the “stone the builders rejected” (Psa 118:22; 1 Pet 2:6-7), yet His resurrection makes Him the cornerstone of God’s kingdom. His life and death embody the “last” becoming “first,” echoing the Genesis pattern and offering salvation to all. In Matthew 20:16 we read about Jesus’ famous saying:
“So the last shall be first, and the first last.”
This verse comes from the Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard (Matthew 20:1-16), where Jesus teaches about the Kingdom of Heaven. The parable shows that the least significant or latest may be exalted, while the prominent or earliest may be humbled.
The sibling rivalries in Genesis—Cain and Abel, Ishmael and Isaac, Jacob and Esau, Perez and Zerah, Joseph and his brothers, and Ephraim and Manasseh—reveal a profound theological truth: God’s sovereign choice often overturns human expectations. Time and again, Genesis subverts the cultural norm of primogeniture, elevating the younger, the overlooked, or the unlikely to fulfill His redemptive purposes.
These narratives are not merely ancient family disputes but divine object lessons. Abel’s favor, Isaac’s election, Jacob’s blessing, Perez’s breach, Joseph’s exaltation, and Ephraim’s precedence all point to a recurring pattern—God delights in choosing the weak to shame the strong (1 Cor. 1:27). This theme extends beyond Genesis, finding echoes in Moses over Aaron, David over his brothers, Israel among the nations, and ultimately in Christ, the rejected Stone who became the Cornerstone.
For those who feel marginalized or inadequate, Genesis offers a message of hope: God’s ways are not ours. He does not measure worth by birth order, human merit, or societal status. His choices are rooted in grace, His purposes in redemption. Whether in the impulsive folly of Esau, the patient endurance of Joseph, or the crossed hands of Jacob, we see that God writes His story through the unexpected.
The ultimate reversal is Christ—the despised and crucified who became the exalted King. In Him, the last are made first, the humble are lifted, and the overlooked are called. Genesis invites us to trust a God who specializes in surprising reversals, turning human weakness into divine triumph. Hold fast to His promises, for He is faithful to fulfill them—often in ways we least expect.
Partner with Dr. Eli today! Whether you choose a one-time gift or a monthly partnership (moderate or large), every contribution (and this is absolutely true!) will impact the lives we will serve together. Click HERE or below.
Comments (176)
I'm a retired psychologist, spending many years working with murderers and psychopaths.
Cain murdered Abel. There was no precedence. How did Cain come up with the idea of ending
the 'thorn' of his eye. Any Hebrew insight into how Cain's brain change? or the hatred of Abel built up
over years of jealously? What is jealously? It is a new feeling even outside the Garden. There was no precedence.
Any Hebrew insight into the word "fear" ?
Humbly learning at your feet.
Rob G
Dear Dr. Gan, I would think that jealousy, or kin’ah in Hebrew, is a visceral response to perceived favoritism—here, God’s preference for Abel’s offering. This emotion, novel in the post-Eden world, likely festered in Cain, fueled by comparison and resentment, warping his perception of Abel as a “thorn.” Hebrew insight into yir’ah (fear) suggests a complex emotion, blending awe and dread, possibly reflecting Cain’s fear of rejection or inadequacy before God. Psychologically, unchecked jealousy can distort cognition, leading to rage and impulsivity, as seen in Cain’s act.
Just adding a point to this deeply insightful exploration: An important question is whether there is a connection between attitude toward serving others and primogeniture, as especially those who were in Christ's lineage had to have the heart of a servant.
Firstborns:
• belong to the Creator
• received a double portion of the inheritance (= are rich)
• took care of their parents and relatives
• are leaders of their families
• are equipped for leadership (with strength, skills, and abilities)
• are tempted to rely on their own strength, wealth, wisdom and efforts (hence, Cain´s sacrifice)
• are tempted to let others serve them, instead of serving others
Yeshua, himself the firstborn, therefore tells other firstborns, including Israel, that whoever wants to be first (= leader) should be a servant to all, as he himself was first and foremost.
Firstborn does not mean bad :-), but God does what he does and we need to ask why.
Thank you for the article. I really enjoy reading these articles.
Do you have any plans on doing any articles on how the church and act was governed?
Did you mean Church in Acts?
Wow thanks for this exposition. I wonder though what to make of it;
the first born of the less liked wife gets a double portion - Deut 21:17 and also God says Israel is His first born and takes Levites in their place. Christ is also first born. So this is a little perplexing?
It is right? Just imagine how it was back in the time when this was REALLY a big deal!
I do really enjoy when you do share some of your translations and insights with us! Thank you for that!!!
Thank you, dear Gerrye!
I am so grateful to those of you who have decided to help me grow this ministry! May God bless you and keep you! If you are interested in making a contribution of any size, whether one- time or ongoing, please click here.
Very affirming to those of us who feel less than first. Ever since my first trip to Israel I became convinced that unless you speak the language the text was written in (including an understanding of common idioms of the time) and have a firsthand comprehension of life in that culture at that time, you will probably read translations and come up with an entirely different understanding of what the text meant. I have also come to believe that everything Jesus taught came directly from Old Testament writings that we don't read comprehend like a person of the time read the original texts. Do you have a course that details the teachings of Christ as he gave people of the time a better understanding of what was intended? Things like the 70x7 times to forgive have to mean something more than "make yourself a doormat to be blessed." Thanks
Dear Bev, in the Schools and Courses section of drelisblog.com you can explore two schools that I am connected with.
I started to post this idea with your Jacob/Esau treatise. I am pleased to see this follow up.
You state: "The text remains silent on why God prefers Abel’s offering" {not Cain's.) I think that can be cleared up. Hebrews 9:20-22 states that without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin. When Adam sinned, G*d killed animals to make clothing of skins. Abel understood this, Cain offered the work of his hands. Most ancient cultures practiced blood sacrifice. Jesus made that sacrifice for all of us.
There is no doubt it can be interpreted this way. I think it's valid to connect something that didn't discuss our topic (Hebrews) to something that preceded it by centuries, but it's also valid to read the text on its own. In the end God chooses because of His will and grace, not because of something the chosen one does right, which to my mind this (blood offering) interpretation implies.
"In the end God chooses because of His will and grace, not because of something the chosen one does right" - Fair enough :^) It relates in the sense that it shows that from the first 'sin' recognized in the Bible the message of the Gospel was already manifest: We are saved by Grace not by our own efforts or goodness.
Yes, but this is classic reading back into the text's much later theology. Common approach, but to me unjustified. :-) If anyone would like to help to grow this ministry, please contribute by clicking <a href="https://jewishstudiesforchristians.com/donate/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=comment-midway-book-publishingresponse" rel="ugc"><strong>HERE.</strong><em></a>
"The second part presents a larger issue..." - :^) That I think that I understand. Our individual relationship with The Unknowable is a never ending revelation through fellowship with the Holy Spirit, the Ruach haQodesh. We *come* to understand that Cain displeased the Lord by offering his 'works'. The Genesis text does not state any causal relationship - BUT it clearly shows that G*d did not condemn Cain for his covetous sin of murder. Likewise Moses sin of murder; likewise David's sin of murder. 🙏
"Yes, but this is classic reading back into the text’s much later theology. Common approach, but to me unjustified" - That seems to go over my head ? I suppose that you could email me if you like. I think am relating the Jewish roots of Christianity... is that 'backwards'? Malachi 3:6 "For I am the LORD, I change not" Isaiah 46:10 "I declare the end from the beginning" 🤷♂️
Hm... how do I explain this better? Basically, we try to read Genesis as if it were the only revelation of God. This will do wonders, I promise. You can later try and piece it together with both other parts of the Bible and LATER THEOLOGICAL CONSTRUCTS. The second part presents a larger issue.
A nice global analyses taking multiple generations and centuries into account. Than you.
Thanks, Don.
You write "Yet Isaac always intended the covenant blessing of Abraham—promising land and descendants—for Jacob (Gen 28:3-4)". This blessing occurs after Jacob deceives Isaac. Having been tricked into blessing Jacob Isaac then continues with the Abrahamic blessing, so why does it indicate that Isaac ALWAYS intended it to go to Jacob?
Because Isaac gave it to him.
Dr. Eli, thank you so very much for this teaching. It opened such insight and greater clarity to, "The last shall be first, and the first shall be last". This gave me so much more for the patterns that God has established in His Word. I do praise Him for His wisdom and authority, and I can see more clearly these patterns at work in this world today in so many instances. Thank you for your spiritual insight that brings profound revelation. Truly, God knows best!
He does indeed! Thank you, Brenda!
I am so grateful to those of you who have decided to help me grow this ministry! May God bless you and keep you! If you are interested in making a contribution of any size, whether one- time or ongoing, please click here.